In Coolidge, her elegant and engrossing biography of the 30th president, Amity Shlaes writes that perhaps the deepest reason for Coolidge’s recent obscurity is that he “spoke a different economic language from ours”:

He did not say “money supply”; he said “credit.” … He did not say “private sector”; he said “commerce.” He did not say “savings”; he said “thrift” or “economy.” … Coolidge at the end of his life spoke anxiously about the “importance of the obvious.” Perseverance, property rights, contract, civility to one’s opponents, silence, smaller government, trust, certainty, restraint, respect for faith, federalism, economy, and thrift: these Coolidge ideals intrigue us today as well.

Coolidge spoke in concise language about character, culture, and religion, all of which he considered we needed more than bigger government:

We do not need more intellectual power, we need more moral power. We do not need more knowledge, we need more character. We do not need more government, we need more culture. We do not need more law, we need more religion. We do not need more the things that are seen, we need more of the things that are not seen.

Back in 1924, when the first biography of Coolidge appeared, it was prominently reviewed in the New York Times Book Review. The reviewer thought the author’s claim that Coolidge’s speech to the Massachusetts Senate as its president had been quoted as often as any in American history other than Lincoln’s Gettysburg address was an exaggeration; but that “if the speech has not been quoted as often as [the author] thinks it has, it deserves to be.” Parts of that speech, he wrote, “ought to be in every American citizen’s Bible.” He singled out this paragraph:

Do the day’s work. If it be to protect the rights of the weak, whoever objects, do it. If it be to help a powerful corporation better to serve the people, whatever the opposition, do that. Expect to be called a standpatter, but don’t be a standpatter. Expect to be called a demagogue, but don’t be a demagogue. Don’t hesitate to be as revolutionary as science. Don’t hesitate to be as reactionary as the multiplication table. Don’t expect to build up the weak by pulling down the strong.

Fast forward nearly a century, to the February 17, 2013 review of Coolidge in the New York Times Book Review, which treated the book as part of an attempt to “resurrect” Coolidge as a “prophet” of an “austere doctrine” of “Republican Calvinism,” with a “liturgy” based on Coolidge’s belief that the federal government should shrink, not grow.

The use of the religious imagery was not intended as complimentary. The reviewer asserted that Coolidge’s “actual record” shows he was “an extraordinarily blinkered and foolish and complacent leader” who is “no model for the present,” but rather “a bleak omen from the past.”

Coolidge’s “actual record”: he inherited a national debt of $28 billion and reduced it to less than $18 billion; he cut the top income tax rate to 25% while balancing the budget and producing surpluses each year; and unemployment was reduced from 5.7 million at the beginning of the decade to 1.8 million when he left office. The economy became popularly known as the “Coolidge prosperity.”

As actual records go, that is not too bad — particularly compared to more recent ones.

In what way/s was Coolidge's world so much "less complicated" than the world of today. In the 1920s, the world was recovering from an horrific war which combined with a devastating influenza epidemic, killed over 30 million people. In the United States from 1919-1922, the nation suffered from perhaps the second worse depression of the 20th century. The race riots in Chicago ( 1919 ) and Tulsa (1921 ) were only the surface of the tensions boiling beneath. Yet, Coolidge ( and Treasury Secretary Andrew Mellon ) realized that the rules of the free market would eventually restore prosperity without having the Federal Reserve inflate our currency to levels that eventually would have made it worthless as our "era of Bernanke" is doing now. I am afraid that many of our citizens are going to learn the hard way that "cheap money" is never cheap in the long run.

I enjoyed Carson's speech - and especially so since he was 'dunking' in the face of an often very petulant Obama in his speech and mannerisms (flipping off people etc.). But Carson was in no way petulant in his speech - he was respectful. Its what he said - and how he said it that generates the respect. He said what he meant and meant what he said.

As for Coolidge I've never read any of his speeches - I'll have to rectify that oversight in my continuing education. Sounds like I would have enjoyed attending his speeches.

"We do not need more intellectual power, we need more moral power. We do not need more knowledge, we need more character. We do not need more government, we need more culture. We do not need more law, we need more religion. We do not need more the things that are seen, we need more of the things that are not seen."

The power and magnitude of this quote is astounding. It is beyond brilliant.

If organized religion is required to save our society then God help us. >:)

I expect that latter day 'Voluntary Associations' will form to help peoplethrough the Hard Times following the coming Crash, take a leading rolein rebuilding the nation, and reform government by limiting the franchiseto those willing to 'buy' it by a career of service to the State before theyearn the right to control the State.

Latter day voluntary associations, like the VFW, the American Legion, parishes, congregations, the Elks, or "voluntary associations" of the "right thinking"?And those would be... people who agree with you?

"I once thought no one Congress or President could do the damage we have seen over the last six years. I was wrong."The big damage started with Teddy Roosevelt. He ran as a Bull Moose Progressive against Howard Taft guaranteeing Woodrow Wilson's Presidency. Progressives are basically Marxists who deny our Constitution, deny our Bill of Rights, and are basically anti-American and anti-freedom. Yes Teddy Roosevelt was a Marxist and an anti-American. So are most so-called Republican moderates of today. I wish they would come out of the closet and admit what they really believe. Mitt Romney said that his views were Progressive. This is Marxism, no matter how softly you evil people want to peddle it.

Wikipedia (hardly a bastion of conservatism): http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economic_progressivism. If you don't have time to read the whole thing: "The economic theory that underpins most of the policies listed above is Keynesian economics. However, many organizations that promote economic progressivism can be characterized as anti-capitalist and include principles and policies based on Marxism, Libertarian Socialism, and other leftwing schools of socio-economic thought."

There is a review of Shlaes’s book in the latest issue of The Economist (Feb. 23 – Mar. 1). It is very favorable and respectful of Coolidge. Conclusion: “Ms Shlaes’s biography provides a window onto an unfairly tarnished period. It deserves to be widely read.”

What marvelous quotations from Coolidge. Will have to read the Amity Shlaes book. I think it is apt to connect Coolidge and Carson. I'm just reading the book Finland, Cultural Lone Wolf, by linguist and cultural expert Richard Lewis. (I'm drawn to learn more about Finland because of their achievements in public education.) Was Coolidge perhaps Finnish? :) The Finns are famously silent, terse in their speech, honest, averse to debt, transparent in their dealings, hard-headed and hard-working, lovers of the austere nature in which they live. I think the Coolidge/Carson values are values for all time and that at least some of us will rediscover them; there are still places in the world where they are the norm.

In what way/s was Coolidge's world so much "less complicated" than the world of today. In the 1920s, the world was recovering from an horrific war which combined with a devastating influenza epidemic, killed over 30 million people. In the United States from 1919-1922, the nation suffered from perhaps the second worse depression of the 20th century. The race riots in Chicago ( 1919 ) and Tulsa (1921 ) were only the surface of the tensions boiling beneath. Yet, Coolidge ( and Treasury Secretary Andrew Mellon ) realized that the rules of the free market would eventually restore prosperity without having the Federal Reserve inflate our currency to levels that eventually would have made it worthless as our "era of Bernanke" is doing now. I am afraid that many of our citizens are going to learn the hard way that "cheap money" is never cheap in the long run.

Jacob Heilbrunn's review of the Shlaes book uses "Republican Calvinism" as an epithet or, at the very least, a denigration. He's wrong; "Republican Calvinism" is -- or certainly should be -- a term of praise. There was a lot of Calvinism in Coolidge, but then there was a lot of Calvinism in the making of America. To a large degree, what used to be called the American Creed is little more than secularized Calvinism. When Coolidge declared that "the things of the spirit come first" or that "we must not sink into pagan materialism," he was speaking what might be called Calvin-talk; in fact, he was speaking the language of the Hebrew Bible as well.

This used to be called "common sense." That a reviewer in the New York Times would call it an "austere doctrine" is a measure of how limp and flaccid the American Left has become.

I enjoyed Carson's speech - and especially so since he was 'dunking' in the face of an often very petulant Obama in his speech and mannerisms (flipping off people etc.). But Carson was in no way petulant in his speech - he was respectful. Its what he said - and how he said it that generates the respect. He said what he meant and meant what he said.

As for Coolidge I've never read any of his speeches - I'll have to rectify that oversight in my continuing education. Sounds like I would have enjoyed attending his speeches.

When a friend has a birthday, a conservative bakes a cake, a classic liberal lights the candles and a leftist blows them out.

In fact, the soul of leftism is to always be blowing out the candles on somebody else's birthday cake. The cannot stand celebration.

Leftism is little more than being a petty, envious, imperious...scold.

As individuals.

As a mob, leftists turn into truth and freedom's robber barons. Incapable of winning a debate they must first rig it with propaganda, force compliance with jackbooted thuggery and ...eventually..."eliminate" those who oppose tyranny.